No Use for the Field

Barry Goldwater was both a fiscal conservative and in his time, viewed as a social conservative. He was also a wartime veteran of military service and an active supporter of U.S. troops in any action the nation committed them to over several decades.

Goldwater understood the differences between conservative positions on social issues of his time and feared what would happen if that wing of his party was ever turned over to the clergy. A famous quote that holds true today is:

"Like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly.  

The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom.  They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent.  

If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.  

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in A, B, C, and D.  Just who do they think they are."


Barry Goldwater said all of that. He died in 1998. One of his last visitors was President Bill Clinton, whom he defended in the heat of the Whitewater scandal. That led him to break with the Republican Party he'd supported for decades.




 If Goldwater were alive today, he would look at this field of candidates and say, "they're not with me.!"   


They have an "Etch-a-Sketch" Mitt Romney, who wants to just shake the board to get a do-over on whatever he says this week to get voter support.

They have Richard "Slinky" Santorum who recoils at the idea that the GOP staying out of people's private lives.


They have Newt "Potato Head" Gingrich, who changes his identity whimsically and still can't get traction with his stale tax cut ideas.


They have wing-nut, Ron "Operation" Paul who served two years as a flight surgeon in the U.S.

Air Force. Paul also served three more in the Air National Guard, but does his early Cold War status have any relevance to today?


The Republican Party to toy box is full of dated, discards screaming for nostalgia.  Close the lid because their promises offer no hope for the future. And would probably not work well for notable conservatives of the past.

Too Many Witnesses

Have you noticed that the only presidential candidate really talking about making the nation better is the incumbent?

While there is an awful lot of nonstop campaigning for the Republican nomination going on, the men seeking the nod all like to blather on and on about "taking our country back," or "returning the nation to what the founding fathers intended," or in some way or another "restoring the freedoms we have lost."

But, really, there are too many witnesses who know firsthand about the shortcomings of the past to want that as a future for their children and grandchildren. I am not talking about slavery, sweat shops or child labor.

Those are all documented historic facts reflecting conditions in the United States that were sanctioned as official policy for decades or centuries. Yet, most of the victims of those systems are gone.

I'm talking about protective covenants in housing; glass ceilings and discrimination in hiring, promotions and other personnel matters, funding inequities in education and health care; discretionary law enforcement in cases of rape, sexual abuse, domestic violence and other crimes; racial profiling, lending and finance and the provision of basic services for socially, physically, or economically disadvantaged populations.
 
There are still millions of people alive who can speak first-hand of such injustices.

The founding fathers had the wisdom to ensure that an independent judiciary would have the final say on all constitutional matters.  Federal judges, and by extension, the Supreme Court have the right and the obligation to periodically reexamine laws and issues to determine whether, based upon reason and the times, certain aspects of American life warrant institutional review, revocation or change.

The problem is that freedom and equality have not always meant the same thing in this country. I've written before about property rights, voting rights, and human rights. People are entitled to all of these things whether they agree with you politically, morally, socially or not.

Religious freedom is not just for Christians, Jews and Muslims, it's also for Buddhists, Wiccans and Satanists.  Local standards and majority customs cannot define who can participate nor can any group force any individual to keep their own beliefs silent in the interests of not offending the majority.

Public education is not just for the gifted, the average and the able-bodied. It is something that is supposed to be universally offered and provided. Yet, more times than not, the courts or advocates have to fight tooth and nail to make sure that some children have access to the programs and services they need.

Women are still fighting for the right to maintain control over when and if they become pregnant, even as some would deny them the choice of whether to become parents.  We are taught that women have the right to say no and expect it to mean no. Now, some politicians are saying "I don't think so." 

Equal access in the job market remains a real challenge for many.  Growing numbers of men and women have learned during the Great Recession that the playing field is not level, and age, race, body type, sexual orientation and other factors can mean the difference between getting or keeping a job, and waiting for calls that never come.

Those who would seek to reign in courts, deregulate business, and limit the rights of the small to challenge the mighty do not offer a free and equal world. Instead they offer an America stripped of many of the protections that have gradually shifted us toward being a nation of greater universal freedoms.

They also promise their would be supporters a future they envision that those who have ever lived with the indignity of exclusion simply cannot allow. If justice is not blind, it is good to have laws and courts to offer her guidance.

 

A More Perfect Union

Before the American Revolution people on the colonies would speak of the rights of Englishmen.

The great leap the founding fathers were willing to make with the U.S. Constitution was support of a paternalistic system that did not deem property as the great legitamizer for voting and other privileges.

Germans, Scots, some French, free Africans and varied people of mixed races gained their rights by helping to create this nation.

Still, it took more than a century for women to constitutionally evolve to full personhood. It has taken twice as long for various ethnic, racial, religious and immigrant minorities to approach that status, and for many, it remains an elusive goal.

You do not hear many people who appreciate egalitarian ideals talking about class struggles, reigning in the courts, or restrictions of hard fought and hard won rights.  People who remember being ignored, structurally underserved, and socially subordinated to the privileged do not look back on those times fondly.

The Irish rose out of their service in the Civil War. Women gained theirs through suffrage movements over 50 years, and grew it through liberating actions of the 20th Century. Italians and various Eastern Europeans emerged from  two World Wars with a bit more of it. Jews gained it through horror, hardship and determination.

Negros who became African-Americans and then just black, native Americans from Florida to Texas and New York to Alaska, Asian and Latin American immigrants and the disabled are still fighting for the incremental gains that lead to it. As are those of  those of nontraditional sexual orientations.

I'm talking about the basic right to be an American. It represents full citizenship .The total sum of rights and privileges that add up to no one attempting to limit your opportunities based upon bigotry, professed gender superiority, or other absurd traditions.

If what once was, conceptually represents something unfair, that should never be resurrected.

I cannot imagine my daughters or granddaughters living under the system my mother or grandmothers were forced to accept.  I do not want any of my young people, male or female,  to work in an economy where standing is determined by color, familial relationships or social association.

I won't embrace a time when contraception availability was a political or religious choice decided almost exclusively by men.

So-called social conservatives often speak of returning the nation to how it once was.  What they seem to desire is a vision of America where the will of a fortunate few is foisted on the many.

America's freedoms continue to evolve. Looking backward to a romanticized past does not mean more freedoms for all. Instead, it is a false hopes that somehow, conforming to the visions of a privileged few.

Anyone who thinks back to the pain of those who had to fight for rights and basic freedoms cannot possibly embrace that vision. America moves ahead and gets better as it evolves, those who long for the past want something that is not good for the rest of us.

Policies and  laws limiting any of us, deprive each and every one of us.That is the true and real threat to our freedoms and our democracy. It is not about returning America to anything it once was, it is really about a future no freedom loving person in their rational mind could ever truly want for themselves or for anyone else.

Life's Choices

Roman Catholics are not required nor do they ever pledge obedience to the pope, prelates (bishops) or priests. A basic foundation of the Roman Catholic Church is the free will of all men and women.

It is the cleric community, ordained priests, nuns and brothers of the order(s) who pledge their obedience.
Yet, there would be no scandals if the vows of poverty, chastity and obedience were followed succinctly. It follows that they too, maintain their free will.

Catholic teachings also take comfort in a forgiving God. While the Church remains Pro-Choice, cradle Catholics and others, note that policy is not doctrine.

It follows that one's views on choice can remain a matter of conscience and a subject open to the individual. While some are passionate, one way or the other, there are still those who do not presume to decide matters of passion or parenthood on behalf of others.  Their nonjudgmental stance is their right and their choice.

With that in mind, one's actions are to be sorted out with their God and not subject to the judgment of man, no matter their views.

One More for the Team

President Obama's reelection campaign will need a lot of volunteers.  

Some will be involved in get-out-the-vote efforts, others will dedicate their time to fundraising. But tens of thousands will be use their talents to support the Truth Team. 

The campaign wants to recruit as many as two million people to pursue a single goal: combatting the misinformation pushed out consistently by the opposition.

"People don't just want tl hear from campaign statements ans ads-- they want to hear from family and friends they trust," said Stephanie Cutler, deputy campaign manager for Obama for America. 

This sounds like the kind of volunteer work I might enjoy.  You sign up online and then start joining the effort to stamp out bull _hit. 

The team will be divided into three parts.  Each unit will have its own Web portal: 

Attackwatch.com will combat basic and over the top nastiness:

KeepGOPHonest.com will challenge Republicans who lie about their records;

And KeepHisWord.com will promote the president's record. 

All of this is necessary because the opposition is willing to say and do anything to win the Whitehouse, retake the Senate and keep control of the House. 

One thing I've learned, over the years, is that you do not edit the president. Once an individual is elected leader of the free world, what he says, everything he says, is a matter of public record.

Honest communicators to not paraphrase, distort or mislead their readers or their audiences with words presidents have not or do not say. When the quotes are available, they simply provide the quotes and let the readers or their audiences form their own conclusions.

Since all sorts of positions, policies and statements are routinely attached to the president and repeated as though they were facts, the need for a Truth Team is obvious.  I think it's a very good idea. I wish them well.

One Busy Tuesday -- It's Election Year

Republican challengers are trying to stake out ground on social issues. Rather than embrace positions that indicate they broadly support individual rights and public policies that offer help and hope to those in need, they have been focusing on singular positions.

The problem with that outlook is that in proclaiming yourself a single issue candidate or even a dual issue candidate you deny the needs and the humanity of  large segments of society.

On a day when hopefuls made headlines railing against the incumbent on birth control and health care coverage, the White House was expressing a willingness to search for compromise.

Also today, a survey commissioned by Planned Parenthood indicated that the majority of voters favor inclusion of contraception in health care coverage.

Meanwhile, the White House announced that it is adding $50 million in funding for Alzheimer's research. That boosts the level of funding to fight a very serious group of diseases and dementia conditions to $500 million this year.

In California, a federal appeals court raised the issue of equal protection in overturning a state constitutional amendment barring gay marriage. That means the U.S. Supreme Court will wind up deciding the issue.

The irony is that in many ways this is a matter of individual freedom. No state or jurisdiction that has taken up the issue has made attempt to force any religious institution or cleric to sanction such unions. The laws as passed are secular.

Perhaps since some of these opposition candidates consider corporations people, those who want to avoid the issue should simply incorporate and merge. Would that end the discussion?

Finally, the opposition hopefuls have been gleefully going around for months raising grand theft money from big donors for Super PACs that are unfettered by existing election laws. As the millions have flowed in, the down and dirty game of wild west politics has been waged in early primary states.

President Obama and his reelection campaign has now announced that big money donations can go to Super PAC that  will spend its money to combat the other guys. Could this be the elusive level playing field we've been hearing about all these years? If we are to exist in a land without laws, then let the chaos begin.

Gradual Shakeout

We already know the Democratic presidential candidate will run on his record.     

 The Great Recession ended under his watch, and despite congressional gridlock, the nation's economy is slowly turning around.

Whether the incumbent is opposed by Mitt or Newt, we will hear loads of promises about job creation, lower taxes and increased opportunity. The problem with that is neither has a track record of making that happen.

Selling off the assets of floundering companies may create limited profits, but it does not put people back to work.Instead, people with jobs are declared surplus, and the machines they used to run to turn out products are shipped abroad for use in sweat shops.

Deregulation that makes outsourcing easier takes away the incentives for domestic growth as quickly as raising taxes.  Contract workers cost about one-third less than permanent staffers and have none of the protections of employees.

Luckily, private sector job creation  is up, and first time unemployment claims are down. All the negative ads and campaign talking points in the world cannot change reality.

Against Their Interests

 "History repeats itself." That adage is familiar to most of us. It can often explain why people who otherwise should have "no dog in a fight" will risk everything they have by taking up a cause that is not their own.

Terms like "class struggle" and "politics of envy" are being used to paint a curious picture of the wealthiest Americans as victims of some unfair conspiracy designed to strip them of their hard-earned riches.

The logic is that "fair-minded people" will see this as a great crusade to redistribute their wealth and rally to their aid by voting for candidates who won't allow such injustices to occur.

The way the last few years have shaken out, we have expanding poverty and we also have expanding wealth. While the number of poor in this country has grown, the richest Americans have seen their net worth expand.

In the center, is the so-called middle class. Most statistics indicate that they have lost ground. Some of them have slipped back into poverty and others have hung on, marking time and hanging tough against the battering waves of  economic  turbulence.


America has been this way before. History tells us that the Civil War nearly destroyed the union. Ninety years after the birth of the nation, more than 618,000 people died in four bloody years of fighting. Slavery and economics were central causes, and rhetoric about states rights fanned the flames and passions between North and South.

Yet, only 7 percent of southerners owned slaves in 1860. That slave owning class represented perhaps one or two percent of the total population of  the nation. Still millions marched off to war willing do die to defend the rights of a very exclusive club.

Now, as then, we have inflammatory rhetoric, enraged passions, and dramatic struggles for support of divisive causes. On the one hand, there are calls for social and economic justice, on the other, there are  demands that we return to or preserve the values and institutions of the past.

 The nation is gripped by the words, voices and images of politicians, the admonitions and warnings of orators and the harsh realities of economic uncertainty. The world is changing and those who prospered most under the old system seek to maintain or restore it, even as others call out for something more.

In such times, it is the extremists whose voices rise above the fray, but in the end, the decisions rests in the hands of the center, and where they choose to stand and fight when their comforts are at stake.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." 

-- George Santayana, U.S. Philosopher, 1865-1952

Out of Touch with Our Times

If you've grown up in a world of Pell Grants, student loans, veterans' benefits and getting shots from public health clinics, it tends to impact your world view.

People who have dealt with the hard realities of layoffs, unemployment, no health insurance and paychecks that don't stretch between pay days have reason to be very concerned about their survival.

The older ones know the younger ones are trying to make it in a world where the rules have been dramatically changed.

If a company fills out its staff with contractors or part-time rs, it doesn't need to think about benefits.  That means no unemployment insurance, health care, vacations, paid holidays or workers' compensation coverage. 

Experts say that can save a firm as much as 30 percent of the cost of a permanent full-time employee. A lot of us know good young people who work two and three part-time jobs to feed their families.

We also know good older people who work everyday and should be seeing doctors. Some of them have no benefits so they just ignore aches, pains and chronic conditions.

Some of us remember the taste of government cheese, white label peanut butter and powdered milk.  If those surplus products were part of your diet, you were glad to get them and scraped out the last drab or crumbs.

We now have a guy who wants to lead the nation who says the very poor have a "safety net."  He says he's not concerned about them or the very rich because, "they are doing quite well."

Many of us, down here in the middle, see the poor a lot differently. You know-- the good people who volunteer at food banks or soup kitchens, or have their homes open to family or friends caught up in an economic struggle created by their times.

Moderate, liberal or conservative, we are a huge part of that safety net.  We're also the cheerleaders, motivators and caregivers who often encourage the hardest hit to stay out there and keep pluggin' away to make things better. We are very concerned about the poor!

I can say that and include some conservatives in the mix because I believe many of them are torn. They may absorb a lot of the harsh rhetoric throughout the week, but they show up on an evening or a weekend and make the sandwiches and sort the clothing for the poor with their preachers. Even they will concede that caring for "those with the least among us" are the virtues they believe they should exhibit for righteous redemption.


Politics and religion in this country are so entwined these days that it is often easy to drown out the cries for justice and compassion. Singular issues come to define believers and nonbelievers for political purposes and reaching out to believers often means denying the humanity and moral worth of those who disagree.

 Right now we have one side attempting to sell the idea that all the poor are "those people." It is a way of saying "they are not us." 

A man who wants to be president says he "likes to fire people," and he wins the endorsement of a wealthy clown who fires people for entertainment purposes on a made-for TV-version of "You Screwed Your Life!"


You also have another guy who is third in line to presidency. He says 'let the housing decline run its course and find its on level,' then we will know where the real market is." He cries often, but would he shed a tear for families losing homes and hope in the worst economic downturn since Herbert Hoover?

Many of the conservatives in Congress who come from truly modest means would destroy the very programs they depended on to provide their escapes from classic blue collar, working class roots.

They would deny housing, health care, and educational opportunities to the poor and leave it up to business to make life better. Business does what is profitable, and encouraging human potential is always more costly than watching coldly as the strongest claw their way to the top.

Play to Win

Some people play politics with a deep understanding of the rules.  They know the differences between what is illegal and just fundamentally immoral.

They are more than happy to mobilize an army of lawyers to defend any and all questionable behavior.  They will vote early by the thousands to be available to watch polling places targeted solely because they are strongholds of their political opposition.  The goal here is voter suppression undertaken under the guise of "discouraging fraud."

There are many other techniques used to reduce participation in elections by many who have the most to lose by staying home.  Challenging the benefits of motor voter laws; Repeating the often wrong idea that convicted felons lose their voting rights forever; phoney flyers and leaflets; misleading robo-calls, and outrageous commercials and ads paid for with soft money from distant SuperPacs.

Then there are the legislative measures designed to carve out political advantages thru redistricting. It often takes years to sort these things out, and in the interim, stays often allow elections to take place "to maintain access to full participation" while the matters are resolved.

A friend suggested recently that we consider registering as independents in large numbers so we could choose unelectable candidates in the opposition's primary.  While that is legal, it is also under the heading of dirty tricks.

Richard Nixon manipulated an election 40 years ago.  12 years ago, lawyers found allies in the Florida courts and we wound up with eight years of Bizarre World non-leadership.

In 2012, you can bet that every tactic listed above will be used by candidates and their supporters committed to winning at any costs.

More than one million black men of voting age, perhaps eight percent of the population have been removed from the coting roles due to felony convictions.  What many do not know is that once they serve their time and complete any court ordered supervision, they could be eligible to have their voting rights restored. Challenged by poll watchers and election judges.

I'm very sensitive about voting rights. Perhaps it is because I remember relatives who could not vote because of poll taxes, literacy tests and other games that were totally legal before 1964, and survived out in the countryside into well into the 1970s.

Because I am pushing 60, I expect my generation to show some guidance and leadership on this issue. We remember the fight for voting rights firsthand. many of us went to college or spent time in military service in areas where we could not vote locally. We also know first-hand the dangers of having no political power in places where we have to survive.

So, giving some thought to the dangers of dirty tricks, I've got a few suggestions:

1) Talk often to anyone and everyone above the age of 17 about the importance of being registered to vote in time for the primaries in your state, or at least in time for the general election.

2) Understand the rules for franchise reinstatement in your state, and be able to explain them to any friend, relative, or runnin' dawg of your children or grandchildren's who may have had a fall in the past and may not know they could be eligible to have their voting rights restored.

3) Stick voter registration cards (available in most libraries, every department of motor vehicles office, and at your city hall and county courthouse) in the glove compartment or console of every vehicle you own, pay insurance on, or make the payments for. Ladies, get in the habit of carrying a dozen in your purse and men, stick three or four in your pocket because you never know when someone might need one.

4) Talk about politics as much as you talk about sports, reality T-V shows, the latest jam, or who's got the best deal on purses or hair. If you've got a church family, and your pastor is not active in civic affairs, talk about politics over social dinners. Commit to getting people fired up about local, national and world affairs one at a time, and touch different people each week or month to make a difference.

Even if you know you can count on them to vote for your presidential candidate, tell them who is running for Congress or your state legislative district. Tell them why they deserve your votes and tell them why the other guy could cause problems for their families and your neighborhood.

5) Don't accept the negative: Even if you do not say "all politicians are crooks, they are all crooks." Remember that can become an excuse for tuning out the whole process.

We know and remember so many people who voted for bigots and even campaigned for candidates they knew would do absolutely nothing to make their lives better. They did all of that because they knew there were even worse bigots and insensitive SOBs laying in the cut trying to seize as much power as possible.

Family members we respected cast their ballots holding our hands in the voting booths and never talked about the weaknesses of the people they voted for. They did it out of hope for better futures for us and our children. Many of us have known politicians who are not crooks. Consider the danger of accepting the fallacy that they all are.

6) Volunteer: You don't have to walk, or even show up at a phone bank anymore. Commit to sending a dozen e-mails, pass on an issues paper, or spend a few minutes talking to a grandchild and their friends about the importance of participation. Do any of those things and you can chalk them up to honoring the generations that fought and died to make those things possible. 

A friend says I live and breathe politics. That's not exactly true. For many years I dealt with politics as a trained observer. While people speak about the "liberal media," I can tell you that there are thousands of professionals covering politics every day who check their personal opinions at the door each day before they do their jobs. It is never easy, but their livelihoods depend upon watching and listening and reporting only what they observe without shading it in any direction.

I can tell you that lots of dumb things happen during political campaigns. Still, most newspeople do not go out of their ways to derail anybody's aspirations for high office.  I do not live and breathe politics. I just have a good idea of what can happen when people tune out, or fail to tune in early enough to really make a difference.

The Nation Needs Great Works

"When more and more people are thrown out of work , unemployment results."-- Calvin Coolidge, U.S. President, 1923-1929

 

Those words made headlines in the Roaring Twenties, they were uttered by a committed deregulator in an era when irrational exuberance dominated the mood of investors, large and small.  Did I mention that the quote came shortly before the Wall Street Crash that led to the Great Depression?

(Photo By: Debra Davis-Holly)

I had really good history teachers in school and my love of the subject has helped me during more than 40 years as a journalist. While the technology changes from one era to the next, many of the problems are basically the same.  

Lessons Learned: When you turn the nation's future over to business, you roll the dice with leaders who are only accountable to their major stockholders. If things don't work out, a lot of little people lose out. 

 

Over the next nine months, we will hear a lot about freeing up business to create jobs and put Americans back to work. I'd love to see more jobs and more Americans working, but the people talking about that don't have real track records of creating good, permanent private sector jobs here at home.  

I'm not talking about part-time positions with no benefits, and I am definitely not talking about contract opportunities that pay by the day and leave workers twisting in the wind on taxes, unemployment insurance and healthcare.

 

Yes, lots of people need jobs, but the Great Recession has ended. Banks that were on the ropes are stabilizing and big manufacturing is rebounding. General Motors is once again the number one manufacturer of automobiles,  less than four years after a government bailout. Most of the Troubled Asset Relief Program funds have been paid back, but there's still a lot of work to be done, and much of that work could be projects literally right in your own backyards.

Drive through your community, or most any community in the nation, and you will see the results of bold infrastructure projects begun or completed as a result of public investment with the help of private labor. 

Examples? The interstate Highway System,  most major commercial airports, courthouses, schools, canals, ports, railroads, bridges, tunnels and water and sewage systems.

Photo By: Derrill Holly

When we have not invested in such things, the nation has suffered. When the world economy has stalled, those projects, financed by debt have kept people working and kept the nation moving forward.  They are productive pursuits that reap huge public benefits and tangible results.

Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton were builders. Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter and two guys named Bush were not.  

 

My conservative friends will note that this is a bipartisan list. It includes visionaries who saw value in using the nation's infrastructure needs to put idle people to work. It also includes a number of "stand patters" who saw no need to modernize. One group looked ahead and the other sought savings that now clearly were not reinvested in the nation's future.

There are obviously no guarantees in life, but if business leaders-- you know, the ones throwing all of  that money into Super PACs-- aren't ready to hire Americans for full-time permanent jobs, I just don't see giving them the reins to the future.

At Risk: 75 Years of Progress

The 2012 elections are about the future. There are alternate versions of that future that could well be determined by one national election and 468 House and Senate races. 

People really need to think about what the vision so-called fiscal conservatives have for the nation. They do not see a role for Social Security, Medicare, Head Start, or universal access to health care. They envision a nation where people can do business with whom they choose, have different pricing structures for different types of customers and refuse to serve areas for any reason they choose, even without explaining it.

Some of them speak openly of limiting or even eliminating the rights of victims to turn to the courts for justice and relief when they've been injured through negligence or circumstance. Some would even shift control of federal money, raised through taxes we all pay into the hands of people in the states, and try to limit the ability of federal judges to intervene under the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

Already, we are hearing candidates label such jurists as "bad judges" because some of their rulings consider Equal Protection central to U.S. laws. They would reduce or eliminate Pell Grants , in favor of loan programs that would turn our children into indentured servants for decades to come. They would privatize Social Security, and look coldly at those whose future security was lost in a system rife with marketplace flaws.

In the age of Super PACs, with unlimited corporate money flowing in to support candidates who would place business ahead of fairness, we have to do more than just focus on the presidency. The prevent defense that's stifled work on Capitol Hill in recent years could be on the beginning. We could see a new "Contract With America" that winds up being a contract on the working man.

Thirty years ago, President Reagan led the charge to turn community block grants over to the states. Now some of those cities that used to receive them contain residential dead zones. They are entire neighborhoods, of abandoned houses, broken glass and decaying streets that rival the brownfields of long-dormant industrial sites we've been dealing with for decades.

Between 1980 and 1997, 27 percent of the nation's public hospitals closed, eliminating 66,000 beds. As Baby Boomers age, Medicare, becomes our problem. Free market healthcare could well jeopardize any retirement we are able to salvage from the Great Recession, and frankly, most of us do not have time to build a financial cushion to protect us from that risk.

Rest, assured, there are many problems, and of course there are limits to what the taxpayers and the nation can afford, but when it comes to programs I know my parents and grandparents depended on and found comfort in, I am just not willing to risk everything on a crapshoot with the profit mongers and speculators.

Who occupies the White House and who does the work on Capitol Hill could well determine if more of that is part of America's vision of the future. Everything from FDR's New Deal to Lyndon Johnson's Great Society is hanging in the balance.


They may say "beating Obama is the most important thing," but believe me, they've got bigger plans than that, and if their vision of "returning to American values" does not include you, then finding that out in 2013 could be a truly costly mistake.

By Any Means Necessary

A lot of us are in the habit of carrying voter registration applications around with us.  We give them to people who may not be registered or may have changed residences since the last election.

Maybe we should take the time to talk about things like voter intimidation and other dirty tricks they may encounter when they head to the polls.  Some people take politics that seriously.

They will lie about their opponents and smile while claiming their motivations are for the good of the country.  If people will destroy jobs to make money, blame the problems of the nation on "those people" and repeatedly desert sick wives for younger women, do you think they won't cheat you out of a vote against them?

Caucus results from eight precincts in Iowa are missing and will likely never be found.  Black people are being labeled as the prime recipients of food stamps even though only 22 percent of the recipients are black. 

If a man abandons sick wives, do you think he'll have much problem ignoring sick and suffering strangers? Then, there are the candidates who would use the courts to force their way onto ballots they neglected to qualify for.

Voter registration is only the beginning, voter education is the rest of the story.  When you talk to would be voters, encourage them to join the fight, then let them know there are people out there working everyday to keep them away from the polls.

Three for Tuesday

The United States is a big country, and the political positions of the people who live here run the gamut. What plays well for Republican voters in South Carolina may completely miss the mark in neighboring Florida. 

This campaign season is shaping up to be full of outright lies and gross distortions.  Some people say all politicians lie.  I'd say that's sad. 

We are not talking about campaign promises here.  Those can be dismissed as hopeful agendas that don't materialize because of time and circumstances.  What I'm talking about is misleading statements about the historic record that many people won't take the time to investigate. 

Campaigning in the age of digital coverage could be different.  Instead of poring over old clippings and microfilms, anyone can sit at home and pull up a candidate's statements as he dashes from one state to the next, altering his position to suit the audience. Truth should not have a regional perspective. 

Speaking of truth and regionalism, Congress gets back to work today. 

The current approval rating is 13 percent.  Since any member of the House not planning on retiring is now in full blown campaign mode, don't expect much meaningful legislation to be passed.  Instead, we will see members posturing for the folks back home. 

They want to say they've been in Washington looking out for your interests.  If nothing gets done, it's those other guys' fault. Or "I worked overtime to keep them from doing that to you." 

The professional protesters will of course be active.  They come in all shapes, sizes, colors and embrace a plethora of causes.  They have a role to play in the system. They are the bones to which the flesh and muscle of dissent adhere.

In America, this is what democracy looks like.  It may not be a perfect system, but at least most of us can play.  Get in the game before those you disagree with run up the score.

Thinning Field

There is an ideological struggle underway as a back story to the race for the GOP nomination.

On the one-hand, you have very angry voters who have dug in their heels behind a vision of America where the people they disagree with do not matter.

On the other hand, you have Republicans who still perceive themselves as moderates. They control a lot of Grand Old Party money. They control a bunch of Political Action Committee donations, and they like to think they control what happens at the Republican National Committee Convention, especially when there is no incumbent seeking the nomination.


In the past, it was this faction of the party that deep-sixed the presidential aspirations of Pat Robertson and  twice got rid of Patrick Buchanan. They assured the first nomination of Ronald Reagan, brought us the compassionate conservatism of George Herbert Walker Bush, and financed the unsuccessful White House quests of Bob Dole and John McCain.

As the battle for the GOP nomination plays out,  the struggle between the angry wing of the party and its wealthy supporters will produce excellent drama. Some candidates will head out on the stump with varied speeches that seem to ask "who are we gonna hate or blame this week? Others will smile and talk about their electability and having the "best chance of beating Obama."

Neither of those themes offer much in the way of new ideas. As we watch the thinning field, just remember that it took the first 12 years of the 21st century to bring the nation to this point. What has happened in the last three was essentially just a few steps toward righting the mistakes of the previous decade.

Voters may be impatient for change, but life is not a sit-com or a made-for-TV movie. You cannot wrap up huge problems into a tidy solution in the last few minutes of a half-an-hour, or the final scenes of DVD.  That means whatever happens Nov. 6, we will still be in the midst of correcting a floundering course. 

So even if you don't have much interest in the opening act for Campaign 2012, tune in to the game from time to time. It will produce some great one-liners, a few interesting quotes, and hopefully, a lot of insight into what these people really think.

Lawyers Can't Do Everything

Lawyers have had a role in elections for decades, but ever since the presidential election of 2000, their role has been totally blown out of proportion.

For many years, they have been on hand to help ensure voting rights, for at least ten years, they have been stationed at polling places to discourage voting.  Assertive speech and accusations can chill the participation of some voters who don't particularly trust the legal process.

Now, some candidates who somehow never got around to building basic political organizations, have been trying to use lawyers to force their way onto the ballots in several states.

Even when people traveled by wagon and coach, somehow they managed to build support across the country to give themselves a shot at winning their parties' nominations. 

To circumvent the basics of politics is an insult to those who dedicate their time and resources to the system. Voters show up on election day, policy wonks and party activists move from one election cycle to the next with only a few days off. They are the people who prepare the nation for elections yet to come.

Everything from poll challengers to paid canvassers and court petitions designed to challenge qualification requirements are measures aimed at corrupting the system. It is sad that respect for the process has been tossed on the trash heap.

It's doubtful I will add to this blog this weekend. I will be celebrating the Martin Luther King Holiday weekend. For those of us who are passionate about civil rights, it commemorates something very special.  As I wrote this week in a basic tweet, "Nothing changes a person's mind about #civil_rights protections more quickly than having theirs #violated."

This is something many of my conservative friends don't seem to understand. Many of my other friends are of a generation that still remembers life without basic #equal_protections.

This is what makes the  #MLK_holiday and the memorial on the National Mall so important.

It took court rulings to force the issue of equal protection in commerce and accomodations. Then Congress wrote laws codifying it to remove the ambiguity for the public. And in the intervening years, the people have gradually come to accept the basic fairness of what the law requires.

I will leave challenging the basic nature of conservative ideology for another day, but I will leave you with this thought. 

If the ethos of America is the equal value of each of its people, then why rail against any laws passed with intent to ensure equal protection? Is it not human nature that keeps each man or woman from being measured equally?

The Business of Governing

While you can try to run a nation like a family, you really can't run one like a business.  The motivations are different.

Families take care of each other.  They recognize strengths and weaknesses and act with empathy on behalf of members in need.  They also keep a place for the rowdy and disagreeable even when it's not easy.

 Businesses try to make a profit. Now there's nothing wrong with profits, but often getting there means neglecting the weak and casting off the disagreeable.  Anybody whose ever worked for a company or in an industry forced to change its business model knows the drill.

"We are downsizing... it's a business decision."  One way businesses have prospered in recent years is to absorb struggling firms, sell off what doesn't work, compromise the old pension plan and contract out production.  "We'll keep the brand, but slap the nameplates on something we made overseas."

Running the nation like a business is a scary approach.  Can you imagine selling off Cleveland, or Buffalo, or St. Louis just because aging urban centers are no longer profitable?

Coming out of the Great Depression, people did not have a lot of faith in bankers. They also expected businesses to change.  Very little of the change that followed was voluntary.

Much of the New Deal wound up before the Supreme Court. While everything the president came up with did not work. Those things that did, have worked well for more than sixty years.

I'm not ready to trust a banker. I also do not want to see the country run like a business.  That kind of mandate could lead to some very good people being declared surplus.

No Envy Here

It is hard being poor. You grow up sharing the little that you have, but you don't really mind that because you don't really know any other way of life.

People tell you that if you study and work hard, there's a chance you can make things better for yourself and your family. A lot of poor people do just that. They don't sit around waiting for gifts and free stuff and they take a lot of jobs that will never make them rich.

Most poor people love their country. Many of them sign up for the opportunity to defend it. If you've never been to a boot camp graduation ceremony, you really haven't met the people who believe in America the most.

They are ordinary people who use their free time to prepare for more opportunities. They take care of their parents, their children and their grandchildren. Then they go to their churches ans their synagogues and temples and thank God for the basics.

We're not talking about luxuries here. We're talking about  good health, shelter and food, and maybe a little extra for some ice cream, or a beer and a couple of dances at a neighborhood bar or sawdust covered, wood floor honkey-tonk, off the county road.

They are also the people who show up with a shovel, a mop and gallon of bleach when a neighbor's home floods or the sewer backs up. They smile and volunteer their time and their limited resources to help out in their communities. What they lack in money, they make up for with warm smiles and sincere desires that every nickel they help raise can help solve a problem for a family up against it.

People like that don't really have a lot of time to envy those fortunate to have a little or a lot more. They have entirely too much to do than to worry about who is rich and who is not.  And they really are too busy trying to stay focused on life and living their faith to hate or blame anyone branded with responsibility for what's wrong with the country.

The term "politics of envy" being thrown around like that is someone's reality. I think to dismiss the wants and needs of people who have struggled to help theiir family's survive the worst economic downturn in 70 years is just cold and heartless.  People want the best for their children.  Many want to give their young adults reasons to hope for a better future. 

While the one percent don't make the country work, it's these people, the ones with the pimples, the bad teeth, the worn shoes and good hearts, that keep faith in America.  They fill the military's ranks, they spend most of their money on basic consumer goods and they never give up hope that better days are ahead for their children and grandchildren. They are the ones who almost always play the hand they are dealt.  The decision makers owe them a fair shake. 

All About Jobs

The first ten years of the 21st Century will be remembered as the Decade of the Deep Hole.

After closing out the Clinton era with surpluses, huge job gains and solid consumer confidence, we hit some big bumps.  Besides two long wars and an unbridaled, irrational spending spree for domestic security, there were policy decisions made to neglect the cities, deregulate business and force the poor to find jobs with limited preparation.  Promises from corporate leaders to create jobs at home never happened.

Many of the offshore jobs they provided collapsed when Americans stopped spending and a worldwide recession took hold.  TARP was suggested and passed as a "Hail Mary" play by leaders who noticed the problems much too late.

The remnants of the 20th Century economy were dashed against the rocks.  Sears, Kmart, Pontiac, Merrill Lynch and dozens of other familiar brands either shrank dramatically or disappeared.

My conservative friends often tell me that government cannot create private sector jobs.  But when you think about it, government contracts in the last decade creates and sustained a whole lot of private sector companies.

It would be simplistic and perhaps unfair to blame the world's problems on Bush 43.  Presidents have power, but they are often at the mercy of world events.  President Obama took charge of a sick economy in a troubled world, but I can say "I am better off now than I was four years ago."  That's one question we won't likely hear asked by the opposition this election cycle.
 
The big issue during Campaign 2012 will be jobs: Getting them and keeping them.

Anyone who openly campaigns by saying they "like to fire people" makes me a little more than nervous.  It says to me that they believe in a world where investors have money and power, and workers and families don't matter.

I am all for change, but I think positive change should create opportunities.  We are now in decade two of the 21st Century.  Most of the TARP money has been paid back, more jobs are being created, and Congress is now in full blown campaign mode.

the one hand, we have a president who inherited the playbook mandated by TARP and made the best of it.  He is working against a recalcitrant Congress to offer leadership during a period of unproductive gridlock.

On the other hand you have six guys who have yet to outline any really better ideas.  Besides the guy who sees value in job elimination, there's the primary architect of 1990s welfare reform that never seemed to accomplish his stated goals.

There's another guy who wants to talk about welfare as those it is a "black thing," there's a guy from Utah who appears to be running because he looks presidential. And then there are my friends from Texas.

One has always been a little quirky but when he starts appealing to more than the fringe it stops being a laughing matter.  The other is a governor who doesn't seem to know the difference between a good job in the oil patch and spatula flipping at Whataburger. I think the difference is probably about 35 grand a year.

Let the campaign continue. America is watching, and some Americans are waiting for jobs.

Standards and Principles

Let's See. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Tawana Brawley.  These are all names that have  come up for years in discussions about the politics of Barrack Obama, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.  Politics can be a very unforgiving process.
People weigh your past voting records and statements. They examine your relationships ans associations. And they consider the actions of your family, your business associates and your high-profile supporters.

When you have to campaign in 50 states and five territories, everything you say, do or ever have done could have a shelf life.   People will remember insensitive positions you've taken against women or minorities. They will also remember your appearances made before or on behalf of organizations and institutions and your associations with individuals.

So, if Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan and Tawana Brawley can be forever linked to some politicians, then surely other politicians should face similar scruitiny. If public denouncements and repudiation are so critical to vindication, then perhaps such demands should be universally applied.

Would that not be holding everyone to the same standards?  Wouldn't that make clarifying where candidates stand on issues such as bigotry a matter of principle?